Sony May Delay PS3 Until 2007
GodFather writes "ArsTechnica posted an article that claims the PS3 may be pushed back as far as 2007 if the Xbox 360 launch flops. The reasoning behind it? If Microsoft comes out with a weak set of titles at launch Sony could delay and build a larger launch library to lay the smack down on Microsoft."
I can't imagine this being a good idea, Sony would be giving Microsoft a chance to keep moving next gen units and Nintendo a chance to leapfrog them with the Revolution while they sit idle just so they can have a larger library on launch? Every moment they sit without units on the shelves gives MS the chance to release the next Halo, plus they'll have next gen titles that would've been ported to both systems. Madden '06 may not be the difference maker, but '07 just might, EA will have had time to tweak to the system more, and make the games better on the 360, but Sony fanboys will be stuck with the weaker PS2 game. My suggestion is kill this idea immediately and get that PS3 out as soon as it's ready for production. Even if the 360 doesn't have a good launch, doesn't mean it wont be successful throughout it's lifetime, something they should think about with reference to their own PSP.
"Plans are for fools! Oglethorpe, the plutonian (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)
Its interesting that this comes quite soon after Bill Gates himself announced that the first next-gen Xboxes would ship with non-HD DVD drives, effectively limiting the launch software to dvd media, and perhaps even limiting all games throughout the lifetime of the platform. If Sony do choose to take extra time in ensuring the launch titles make the absolute most out of the additional storage capacity and performance available on the PS3, it could be enough to provide a killer blow even to a successful xbox 360. If the PS3 manages to blow the xbox away in terms of game visuals/depth, then they'll almost have skipped a generation and taken the fight right back to microsoft.
Business Voyeur
I don't think it's all that bad of a move. First off, both the Xbox 2 (Quick, give it a name with a 3 in it or it'll look bad compared to Sony...feh.) and the PS3 were rushed due to competition with each other. If the Xbox fails because of that, and because they rushed to undercut even Sony's timetable, then it clearly makes sense. Above and beyond that, though, Sony is really more about franchise loyalty and the flavor of games produced for it, and they have plenty of games slated all the way through next year for the PS2. They're not going to lose their core audience to Xbox. Most Playstation fans who want a game that comes out on XBox will wait and buy it for their actual computer. Meanwhile, if they did delay, the PS3 might actually manage to live up to part of it's hype, something I don't have a lot of hope for given the release-date war between Sony and Microsoft. Eventually it reached some obscure level of corporate triple-dog-dare, and Sony called them on it. If they succeed Sony will have to launch, if not they can stand their laughing and calling MS a dumbass for trying it. I can only imagine the screams of pain from engineers everytime MS and Sony's marketing teams released a revised release date.
I wouldn't mind seeing both of these consoles delayed for a year or so. It seems like both systems were hyped far too much to even begin meeting the expectations of gamers and programmers. This way the hardware might be upgraded some and developers would have more time to fiddle with it. This actually seems like a good move for overall quality.
Normality is now: overrated.
Come on, whats the point of even debating this. Microsoft is not going to be weak at release anyway. Even the games are complete turds people are going to lap it up because they have the jump on the next gen.
Crapshoot.
If anything would inspire delayed release I would say it would be prohibitive release cost - which they have alluded to somewhat.
Honestly there are too many articles about these new consoles that are just clear efforts by the guys in marketing to keep the tongues wagging. I believe this wasted to fark like 24 hours ago too.
It's somewhat believable if you look at how Sony treated the Dreamcast. Sony was pushing the PSX while hyping the PS2, doing whatever they could to stop people from buying a DC until they could roll out their competition for it, almost a year after the DC shipped.
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
There's no indications anyone outside the company even has something looks like a dev kit yet, they haven't revealed what the machine even is to the public and I don't think they've revealed it to most developers. Microsoft's got, like, near-finished games. Sony's got devkits going out and they're publicly apologizing to developers for not being able to manufacture enough of them. Ask Nintendo what they're up to? They talk about the DS and its online plans.
I don't think Nintendo's anywhere near ready to ship this thing.
Also their memory supplier let slip that they believed the revolution would ship in "mid-2006". Take that however you want.
My personal suspicion would probably be that the Revolution is going to be released last. Nintendo's either got the most amazing show of secrecy ever constructed among men, or they aren't nearly as far along as Sony and Microsoft. And I doubt Sony will delay a console release just because they don't have any games. They didn't delay the PS2 launch for lack of games, they didn't delay the Japan PSP launch for lack of games, and when they delayed the American PSP launch (for lack of games at the time of Japanese launch?) it didn't really help them much.
If I'm right about this, though, Nintendo probably won't suffer much for coming out last. They seem to be going for a very different sort of strategy next generation than Sony and Microsoft.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Sony is having serious trouble financially. The company announced recently that they are trimming revenue forecasts for the year by 80%. That is just astronomically bad considering they can't seem to turn a profit as it is. Not all analysts are wrong, so just keep watching to see what happens.
As long as I can get a $100 XBox out of the deal.
Wow,once again the clueless analysts have shown us the light. Honestly, if these people were really all that good at spotting industry trends and making accurate predictions they'd be working in the industry.
From the column:
Merrill Lynch estimated that the cost to produce a single PS3 would be a shade under $500. Considering that the Xbox 360 is expected will be priced at around $299, it was felt that even a $399 price tag on the PS3 meant Sony taking a $1bn hit on hardware costs alone in the first year.
When you consider that they've packed Bluetooth, HDTV (a feature Nintendo ended up dropping because of cost) and the first Commercial release of Blu-Ray in there, it's not too surprising that the earlier they launch the console, the harder Sony's going to get hit in the pocket.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever.
- George Orwell
I really think Nintendo is going to do well next generation, what with five excellent game consoles in one (NES, SNES, N64, GC, Revolution!) Third parties will re-release their old software via download (Square-Enix's original Final Fintasy or Tecmo's Ninja Gaiden anyone?), then have a built in customer base to sell their more recent version of classic IP to. They just announced Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest will no longer be PS2 exclusives, opening the door for the regular series to come back to Revolution...where they belong! Nintendo's is a can't miss and can't really copy strategy (because the other two systems have only ever had high-memory use CD and DVD drives and games) that will only build on its own success. And that doesn't take into account the controller and arguably the best looking and ergonomic next gen design and mass market price... Watch what happens when details are released, and even more when people actually get to play with the thing! Don't overlook Nintendo. They've got a pretty good chance of winning us back.
Alright, let's assume for a moment that the Xbox 360 launch is a total flop. People just can't seem to justify the price tag for the one or two games they want to play at launch. Sony then delays the PS3 for a year so they can bolster their game library. Seems reasonable, except for the fact that the Xbox 360 will ALSO be bolstering it's game library continuously from the day of it's launch. Is the analyst just assuming no more games will be released after the launch titles? That's simply ludicrous. Hell, if Sony delays the PS3 for a year to improve it's game library then Microsoft will have a chance to lower it's console's price during the PS3's launch a year later. Then you have an interesting scenario where the Xbox 360 is cheaper and has more games that people know are good while the PS3 is more expensive with a ton of games that nobody has played yet.
Second, I don't think the new PS2 price cut is going to take away the Xbox 360's thunder. That's just on opinion of course and I have no idea how it will pan out. But considering the PS3 launch is (supposedly) fairly soon after the 360's launch I would rather save my money and buy that than an aging PS2.
Third, I've seen a lot of mention about the whole HD-DVD thing in this thread. Now console players are usually not as tech savvy as say a PC gamer. They don't have to be. Out of idle curiosity I asked my friend who is a major console gamer what he thought of Microsoft decision to not include an HD-DVD drive with the 360. He just sort of looked at me blankly, he had no fucking clue what it was. So will this hurt Microsoft in the slightest? Possibly if the media screams about them not having HD-DVD, but more than likely, no. I personally feel that an HD-DVD isn't even needed for the next-gen consoles, but hey, everyone can have an opinion eh?
Now assuming Microsoft doesn't completely fuck up the launch (i.e. - letting a major bug that renders the console useless slip by them, such as exploding power supplies) then I can't even see the console flopping. But even if it does Sony would be making a huge mistake by delaying the PS3 another year.
Besides, the Xbox has Halo and a few other decent games. The main one is Halo though. Halo 3 will sell the Xbox 360, there's no question about it. This is a moot speculation by an analyst who obviously doesn't know what he's talking about.
That's completely incorrect. Unlike Office, Microsoft loses money on each console sold. If everyone threw out their old Xbox 360 and bought an xbox 360.5 when the new edition came out, Microsoft would lose obscene amounts of cash with 0 return. If microsoft had it's way, you would only buy one console and share it with like 10 friends who all still bought games. Everyone seems to think microsoft is out to sell Xboxes... they aren't, they just happen to have to sell them in order to charge license fees from developers.
Sony reduced the "Profits" forecast by more than 88%, not the "Revenue" forecast. "Revenue" acutally declined by 1%. Reducing a "Revenue" forecast by 80% would be like an earthquake with magnitude 8.5 in the center of Tokyo.
Signature deleted by lameness filter.
When has Microsoft announced that? The only info about HD-DVD and Xbox360 I found was this quote from Bill Gates:
"The initial shipments of Xbox 360 will be based on today's DVD format," Gates explained. "We are looking at whether future versions of Xbox 360 will incorporate an additional capability of an HD DVD player or something else."
That could just as easily mean Blu-Ray, depending on which format takes off in the consumer market. And yes, I know Microsoft is one of the supporters of HD-DVD, but if Blu-Ray becomes a great success in the couple of years before the Xbox360 2.0 comes out, I don't really see how they could try to force HD-DVD on people.